The Practice of Naturalness: A Historical-Philosophical Perspective
No evidence of “new physics” was found so far by LHC experiments, and this situation has led some voices in the physics community to call for the abandonment of the “naturalness” criterion, while other scientists have felt the need to break a lance in its defense by claiming that, at least in some sense, it has already led to successes and therefore should not be dismissed too quickly, but rather only reflected or reshaped to fit new needs. In our paper we will argue that present pro-or-contra naturalness debates miss the fundamental point that naturalness, despite contrary claims, is essentially a very hazily defined, in a sense even mythical notion which, in the course of more than four decades, has been steadily, and often not coherently, shaped by its interplay with different branches of model-building in high-energy physics and cosmology on the one side, and new incoming experimental results on the other. In our paper we will endeavor to clear up some of the physical and philosophical haze by taking a closer look back at (real or alleged) origin of naturalness in the 1970s and 1980s, with particular attention to the early work of Kenneth Wilson. In doing this, we aim to bring to light how naturalness belongs to a long tradition of present and past physical and philosophical criteria for effectively guiding theoretical reflection and experimental practice in fundamental research.
KeywordsHistorical contextualization Naturalness Renormalization Group Kenneth Wilson Physics beyond the Standard Model
We are grateful to the participants of the 2018 Aachen workshop on “Naturalness, Hierarchy, and Fine Tuning” and to the anonymous referee for very helpful comments and suggestions. Arianna Borrelli wishes to acknowledge funding by the project “Exploring the “dark ages” of particle physics: isospin, strangeness and the construction of physical-mathematical concepts in the pre-Standard-Model era (ca. 1950–1965)” (German Research Council (DFG) Grant BO 4062/2-1), and the Institute for Advances Studies on Media Cultures of Computer Simulation (MECS), Leuphana Universität Lüneburg (DFG research Grant KFOR 1927).
- 5.Borrelli, A.: Between logos and mythos narratives of ’Naturalness’ in today’s particle physics community. In: Blume, H., et al. (eds.) Narrated Communities—Narrated Realities Narration as Cognitive Processing and Cultural Practice, pp. 69–83. Brill, Leiden (2015)Google Scholar
- 6.Dine, M.: Naturalness Under Stress. arXiv:1501.01035. Accessed 17 Aug 2019
- 8.Ellis, J., Gaillard, M.K., Zumino, B.: Superunification. CERN preprint TH-3152-CERN, later published in: Acta Phys. Polonica B 13, 253–283 (1982)Google Scholar
- 13.Giudice, G.F.: Naturalness after LHC8. arXiv:1307.7879. Accessed 17 Aug 2019
- 14.Giudice, G.F.: The dawn of the post-naturalness era. arXiv:1710.07663. Accessed 17 Aug 2019
- 18.Hossenfelder, S.: Screams for explanation: fine-tuning and naturalness in the foundations of physics. arXiv:1801.02176. Accessed 17 Aug 2019
- 19.Maiani, L., Bonolis, L.: The charm of theoretical physics (1958–1993). Eur. Phys. J. 42, 611–661 (2017)Google Scholar
- 21.Patrignani, C.: Particle data group: review of particle physics. Chin. Phys. C 40, 10000 (2016)Google Scholar
- 24.Pickering, A.: Constructing Quarks: A Sociological History of Particle Physics. University of Chicago Press, Chicago (1984b)Google Scholar
- 26.Veltman, M.: The infrared-ultraviolet connection. Acta Phys. Polonica B 12, 437–457 (1981)Google Scholar
- 29.Wells, J.D.: Lectures on Higgs Boson physics in the standard model and beyond. arXiv:0909.4541. Accessed 17 Aug 2019
- 32.Williams, P.: Two Notions of Naturalness. Foundations of Physics (2018)Google Scholar